Peter's Viewpoint

It is a very sad day at Davos and the Financial Times or ft.com when they must stoop so low that they have to create headline news stories to make a buck for themselves and anyone to the extent of toppling countries.

A small minded reporter strives to brand himself among the rich and brainless.  The reporter rudely chased the prime minister of a country through the passages of the world financial meeting trying to force a microscopic economic statement that will give the reporter the credits he needs to brand him as a “mover” or “shaker” but not glib enough to evoke any profitable essence.

If the financial times has reached this level of publishing, then what else have they published that may simply be considered as an inconclusive non-objective newscasts and possibly cause investors to loose more money than they gain by not reading or looking at the information of a major financial paper.

The defamation of a country is not about one person but an entire nation and during times of malignant economic crisis can be as devastating as launching a weapon of mass destruction.  Both the USA and Greece’s leaders entered their positions like Atlas carrying the weight of the world; they can only attempt to correct the inabilities of their predecessors because there is no book on “how to solve the world crisis”.

The Financial Times should consider the repercussions that their reporters may have before issuing bogus statements that are disorient stock investors.

The status quo may have just been changed as this was the first time that the rich and famous have been penalized according to their wealth.

An event in a court in Switzerland took place this week when the trial of a very well to do person was convicted of speeding.  Okay, people are convicted of speeding everyday so why was this so different?

The person caught speeding is an established millionaire.  The defendant’s record showed that the driver had broken the law repeatedly and therefore determined that the only way to effectively punish the driver was to assess a penalty according to the income.  The outcome was a fine equal to the amount of 290,000 US Dollars.

This brings another case to mind which concerns the attitude of the rich and famous, that of Paris Hilton.  What do I have against the rich and wealthy?  Nothing but I do despise bad influences and corruption especially when they affect young people creating the imagination that the rich and famous are above the law.
If the court does not want Paris Hilton to suffer staying in a jail cell, maybe they should consider fining her in the amount of say half a million dollars.  That might open her mind while providing additional funds for society.

Although laws are made to protect us and are supposed to be equal, the penalty for breaking the laws are not.  We have seen on more than one occasion that those who well off financially escape the punishment because they had the ability to hire the most expensive lawyers and probably affect the jurors if not the judge allowing them to avoid the final outcome of punishment that the less advantaged would incur.

Are laws made to protect us? I have been driving since I was 16 and have seen laws created regarding the installation of seat belts and air bags and will probably see other new ideas installed in cars that have managed to save people.  Eventually these laws and inventions gave people the ideal that they can drive anyway they want and they won’t get hurt.

So based on this thinking, not wearing a seat belt means that yes you will be fined because the government wants everyone to be protected but at the same time, the seat belt and air bags are like giving drivers more of an excuse to talk on mobile phones without worrying too much about the consequence of a collision.

What would happen if the seat belt and air bag only for the driver were removed from vehicles? 

Now that’s another thought to be considered with fines analogous to income!

A link to the story about the driver in Switzerland.

These days’ people in Greece are somewhat oblivious as to the meaning of what happens when a country goes bankrupt but it is probably because there are no specifics.

If you search the Internet, you may find a few fragments of what could happen but nothing in detail even though a number of countries have already gone through the process including Greece in the past.  Yes, history does repeat itself but why are those that are historically oriented unaware or are they?

While Greece undergoes experimenting with a variety of change, Europe continues delegating laws without thought to the overall affect on the people of Europe.

One such law is that of equal automobile insurance for the protection of motorists and property.  The politicians in Brussels have inflicted higher costs to countries that are unequal in pay scales.

The controversy of income versus cost is an issue in Europe because northern Europe is economically more powerful than southern Europe historically as it was between the North and South in the USA.

As a comparison, the economics of living are much different in the USA.
People living in Florida do not have the same cost of living or salary income when compared to those in New York.  In Europe people are assuming that they will receive the salaries of those who are living in England or Germany because their country has become a member state.

The bases of these ideas are erroneous but the politicians in Brussels continue to exploit the lower priced food productions of the southern Europeans without much ado to their outcome.
Northern Europeans enjoy the privilege of a higher income that offsets their cost of living while the cost of living for southern Europeans is not analogous to their income.

When creating equality among the member states, people should consider the fact that they may utilize the resources of other countries whether they live there or are sight-seeing.  We need to have equality in services such as hospitals and insurances, transportation, electricity, water, communication, and any other facilities that are available in a national environment with the ability to pay for those expenses but a system that does not compromise the incomes of the poorer member states to accomplish it.

Europe needs to have equality and not only in a state wide protection but without penalizing member states for the costs otherwise they will have to consider the equalization of income.